Review Scientific Monthly Abstract Guidelines before you start your review.
Title
- Please copy title exactly how it appears in the article
Reference
- Please use the pubmed reference formatting. This should appear exactly as it does in the pubmed search.
- Example: Westin O, Nilsson Helander K, Grävare Silbernagel K, Möller M, Kälebo P, Karlsson J. Acute Ultrasonography Investigation to Predict Ruptures and Outcomes in Patients With an Achilles Tendon Rupture. Orthop J Sports Med. 2016 Oct 14;4(10)
Level of Evidence
- Add level of evidence
Scientific Literature Review
Reviewed By
- Resident name performing the review
Residency Program
- Residency name including city and state
Podiatric Relevance:
- This section should be brief, however direct and to the point.
- Why is this article interesting to a podiatric surgeon? Perhaps this is the reason why you chose this particular article.
- What hypothesis or clinical question(s) were the authors attempting to answer?
Methods:
- Do not directly copy and paste from the article and/or abstract. This is not intended to discuss every minute detail from the methods, however it is intended to give the reader an overview of the study performed.
- Briefly review the study design and outcome measures utilized to answer the hypothesis or clinical question.
Results:
- What were the specific results of the investigation?
- You may list results or discuss results. This should include results of the outcome measures discussed in the methods section.
Conclusions:
- You have the most flexibility with this section and really should be the substance of the review.
- What did the authors conclude from the above results?
- What conclusions do you reach from the above results?
- How will this information help (or not) you treat the next patient you encounter?
Note:
- Submission must be in MS Word
- Single spaced (zero spacing before and after each line)
- Times New Roman
- Size 10
- 500-word limit (excluding Title, Reference, Reviewed By and Residency Program).